Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Romney: How to Lose the Most Important Election of our Time by not Really Trying ^ | September 21, 2012 | Don Feder

Posted on 09/22/2012 8:28:48 AM PDT by Stepan12

Mitt Romney is losing the most important election of our lifetime. Don’t be deceived by the polls that show him “within the margin of error.” Don’t put your faith in last minute media-buys from the campaign’s gargantuan war chest.

Don’t expect the debates to turn things around. The president may not be an electrifying speaker, but he knows how to demagogue. His message will be: I love the middle class; Mitt Romney wants tax cuts for millionaires and eats children.

And, don’t count on the fact that public opinion is against Obama on almost every significant issue. (At no time since its passage has less than a majority favored repeal of Obamacare.)

The stars should be perfectly aligned for a Republican blowout this year. The economy is in the dumpster – deficits to dwarf anything we’ve seen in the past, the highest sustained unemployment since the Great Depression, anemic growth, huge tax hikes just around the corner, consumer prices through the ceiling – and the man responsible for it all is coasting to a second term.


The Governor, bless his bland little heart, is the worst candidate the GOP has fielded since Viagra Bob Dole – so bad he makes John McCain look like Harry Truman on his 1948 Whistle Stop Tour.

Almost every national poll shows Romney behind by 1 to 8 points – Rasmussen (Obama 47%, Romney 45%) Gallup (47% to 46%), Washington Post (52% to 44%), AP (47% to 46%) and Pew Research (51% to 43%).

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: boring; chickenlittles; handwringers; loser; romney; romney2012; romneytoast; toast; troll; trollbgone; trolls4obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-192 next last
To: MNJohnnie

Yep - Mitt’s bride said it well the other day - this crap has to stop. With sopposed republican/Liberals constantly wringing their litel pudgy hands over all the supposed gaffes and lack of clarity, it’s no wonder our side is bouncing between despair and anger.

21 posted on 09/22/2012 8:46:44 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12
Well, Mittens is a mediocre politician at best and just not a good candidate.

Still, the country is in such dire shape I don't see how Hussein gets re-elected. My prediction: Mittens by 4 in the popular vote and around 300 EV.

22 posted on 09/22/2012 8:48:30 AM PDT by LiveFree99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mygirlsmom
Mitt knew he could say what he wanted against Gingrich; etc., with nary a word from the drive by media. And however the polls are weighted, I think Gov. Romney should be more agressive against the Communist Obama.

McCarthyism? The Communist newspaper, "The Daily Worker," coined that term to smear Sen. McCarthy.

23 posted on 09/22/2012 8:48:32 AM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12; trebb; republicanRocker
Don Feder is a former Boston Herald writer who is now a political/communications consultant. He also maintains his own website,

No wonder Feder is too gutless to attack the Leftist media machine. He is part of it.

24 posted on 09/22/2012 8:50:08 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Romney’s lack of fire in the belly gives all conservatives fear. Fear causes a shrinking away, a lack of confidence. The only thing Romney hasn’t done that McCain did, is to say that Obama would be a good president if elected, though Romney does say that Obama is a good man... watch this video, this is what we are all dying to get behind...

25 posted on 09/22/2012 8:52:48 AM PDT by dps.inspect (rage against the Obama machine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
When Don Feder was in "The Boston Herald," it was a Conservative or more Conservative counterpart to Massachusett's extremely Liberal newspaper, "The Boston Globe."

Whatever the accuracy of Don Feder's analysis, he is no phony or closet Liberal. Decades ago when I was a kid, I helped put up posters around Boston, supporting the Conservative cause. Posters that Don Feder made.

Don Feder also wrote two books. One of them was featured, interestingly enough, at a JBS meeting I attended (no, I am not a member).

26 posted on 09/22/2012 8:54:15 AM PDT by Stepan12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mygirlsmom

This is so well put, and demonstrably true, but it’s not “politically correct” to say it on this forum, as the tone of most of the comments here indicates.

27 posted on 09/22/2012 8:54:25 AM PDT by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dragonblustar
It’s not just Romney’s fault. America has some die hard morons who just love Obama. They may not be as vocal about as they were four years ago but they are still out there and will vote for Obastard again.

We also have the most dishonest media ever. The kind of press that Stalin would be proud of.

Tell you the truth, that is the unknown "x" in the equation, there are so many "dumb clucks" (can't use the other word) that would vote for Bammy. I don't think there are as many as there were four years ago but there are still a good number of them.

As to the media, one difference, at least the media under Stalin was forced to do his bidding or they'd be in the gulag, the media here are willing to serve their (false) "god."

This is a key election and I do think Romney will pull it off, I keep thinking of Carter in 1980. We need to think positive, hopefully it will be enough to get him over the top, we can't be distracted by stuff like this and polls.
28 posted on 09/22/2012 8:55:19 AM PDT by Nowhere Man (June 28th, 2012, the Day America Jumped The Shark.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12; All
Although an admirer of the author, many such "conservative" writers now seem more intent on "cursing the darkness" instead of "lighting a candle" of understanding among voters who might come to see the destruction of America's foundations being wrought by this President!

Considering what is at stake here, conservatives who have an "audience" would do well to amplify Romney's message by doing their own part in spreading the light of liberty.

It reminds me of the answer James Russell Lowell gave to the French historian, Guizot, about how long the American Republic could endure, as related by Dr. Russell Kirk in the following essay, which may be helpful in weighing the importance of this election. The Kirk essay is from the cited book source, but also is available for reprint and distribution here.

Will The Great American Experiment Succeed?

Thomas Jefferson, in his First Inaugural Address, enumerated what he called 'the essential principles of our government. . . which ought to shape its Administration.'

He then stated: "These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civil instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."


When asked by a curious citizen after the adjournment of the Constitutional Convention what kind of government had been structured by the Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin is said to have answered: "...A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT."

The extensive Constitutional republic they envisioned, in reality, became a place of liberty and opportunity for countless millions of people from all over the world. Their ideas work­ed, because they were based on enduring principles which recognized human imperfection and the need to structure a limited government of laws, dependent upon the consent of a people who, themselves, understood the principles.

The Distinctiveness of the American Experiment as Laid Down by the Founding Fathers:

What Has Happened to the Philosophy and Principles Held by the Founding Fathers?

Have we kept faith with their ideas of republican (represen­tative) government and of the virtue which must underlie such an institution? As Andrew Jackson observed: "It is well known that there have always been those amongst us who wish to enlarge the powers of the general govern­ overstep the boundaries marked out for it by the Constitution." Such is certainly true in 20th Century America! Not only do the various branches of government seek ways to expand their power by changing the Constitu­tion, but there are well - organized and heavily-funded organi­zations actively at work to make serious changes in the Founders' system.

Can America Lose Her Freedom?

An examination of the history of civilization reveals that nations have risen, and they have fallen. Governments have been formed, and they have been dissolved. People have become free, and they have fallen into slavery again. Toynbee observed that 19 of the world's 21 significant civilizations disappeared from the face of the earth - not from assault by outside forces, but from deterioration within the society.

Many would contend that America has departed from the intentions of its Founders in a number of significant ways. Others, whose judgments are less categorical, at least would acknowledge that there are valid reasons for such a judgment.

Some Major Departures From The Original
Philosophy, Principles And Intent Of The
Framers Of Our Constitution:

Through liberal judicial interpretations of the necessary and proper" and "general welfare" clauses, as well as the commerce clause, the national government has gained sufficient power to intrude into virtually all concerns and areas which were originally intended to be within the domain of the states (See: Part V, Federalism). What is more, the courts, through the process of 'selec­tive incorporation,' have used the Fourteenth Amend­ment to nationalize and apply the Bill of Rights to the states. Various Amendments have also served to weaken the state governments, albeit indirectly. For instance: the Sixteenth Amendment, through its provision for federal income tax, has made the states, to a great extent, dependent on the national government. The Seventeenth Amendment, which changed the Framers' intent as to the manner in which the Senate would he determined, has served to reduce the influence and balance of state interests in the na­tional councils.

The Framers believed that it would be the Legislative branch, armed with the most important powers of govern­ment, which would pose the greatest danger to the separa­tion of powers. For this reason, they divided the legislature into two houses and strengthened the Executive and judiciary branches. Over time, however, the Congress has delegated much of its authority to the Executive branch or to independent regulatory bodies. On the other hand, the judiciary, which the Founders believed to be the weakest of the branches, has asserted the doctrine of judicial supremacy-that its interpretation of the Con­stitution is authoritative and binding on the other bran­ches (an idea clearly not held by Jefferson, Madison and others). In addition, the courts have in fact 'legislated' to bring about changes which they contend are mandated by their interpretation of the Constitution (See: Part V, Separation of Powers). These "positive resolutions" on the part of the courts are seen to run counter to the Founders' idea of representative (republican) government, because they represent a usurpation of the legislative function, and ignore the voice and consent of the people through their elected representatives. This bypasses the slow and deliberative amendment process provided by the Constitu­tion for making changes to that document.

Although the word "rights" remains an important part of the political and social vocabulary, the perception that individual rights are of divine origin has been largely excluded from public discourse. What was once the very cornerstone of the philosophy of freedom expounded by the Declaration of Independence-that a Creator endow­ed human beings with rights and the liberty to enjoy those rights - has virtually disappeared from the textbooks of the nation and from the public statements of many leaders. Indeed, rights are now thought of as man-made and emanating from government. As such, the concept of rights not only has been secularized but trivialized as well. After all, what is the authority for such rights? Any self-proclaimed entitlement to special treatment, privilege, status, or benefit conferred by government can, by inference, be withdrawn. Moreover, the modem no­tion of man-made rights does not embody the natural law injunction that the exercise of a right embodies a corresponding obligation to observe the rights of others, nor does it recognize the "laws of nature and of Nature's God" described by the Declaration of Independence.

In this connection, the rights specified in the Bill of Rights frequently have been interpreted in an arbitrary manner without regard to the tradition or values which they were designed to protect and preserve. For instance, the First Amendment's provision that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" has been 'inter­preted' in a manner not in keeping with Jefferson's idea that the "liberty to worship our Creator" had been "pro­ved by our experience to be its [government's] best support." In this and other areas, rights are upheld quite apart from the Framers' concerns for civil or ordered liberty, or for the ends of government, especially those set forth in the Preamble. Alexandr Solzhenitsyn's scathing critique of Western moral values, and those which have gained currency in the United States in particular, drives this point home:

"Destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society appears to have little defense against the abyss of human decadence, such as, for example, misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, motion pictures full of pornography, crime and horror."

Professor Lino Graglia, a harsh critic of the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the Bill of Rights, makes much the same point in another context: "The Court has created for criminal defendants rights that do not exist under any other system of law-for example, the possibility of almost endless appeals with all costs paid by the state ­ and which have made the prosecution and conviction of criminals so complex and difficult as to make the at­tempt frequently seem not worthwhile...By undermining effective enforcement of the criminal law...the Court has diminished our liberty to walk the streets of our cities with a degree of security".

One of the primary concerns of the Founders was the establishment of a sound monetary system which would provide stability and would assure the citizens that govern­ment could not manipulate their currency and confiscate their earnings through inflation, a problem with all un­backed paper currencies of the past. By various legislative and judicial actions, United States citizens no longer possess a currency with its own intrinsic value. Unbridled government spending and debt plague the nation. Since the withdrawal of gold coins in 1933, the nation has experienced a cumulative inflation of over 821%.

"Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people...said John Adams. And Thomas Jefferson declared: "Whenever the people are well-informed they can be trusted with their own government...The boys of the rising generation are to be the men of the next, and the sole guardians of the principles we deliver over to them."

Early generations of Americans were taught the principles upon which their nation had developed its Con­stitution. The Founders believed that the real security for liberty would be a people who could understand those ideas which are necessary to preserve liberty and who could perceive approaching threats to their freedom. For that reason, a primary purpose of the schools was to teach boys and girls to read and write so that they could study the ideas of freedom. A popular textbook for children was entitled "Catechism on the Constitution." Written by Arthur J. Stansbury and published in 1828, it contained questions and answers on the principles of the American political system.

Tocqueville's Democracy In America , written in the 1830's, described America's aggressive process of univer­sal education on the Constitution and the political process:

"It cannot be doubted that in the United States the instruction of the people powerfully contributes to the support of the democratic republic; and such must always be the case, I believe, where the in ­ struction which enlightens the understanding is not separated from the moral education ...." The American citizen, he said, "..will inform you what his rights are and by what means he exercises them .. In the United States, politics are the end and aim of education ... every citizen receives the elementary notions of human knowledge; he is taught, moreover, the doctrines and the evidences of his religion, the history of his country, and the leading features of its Constitution .... it is extremely rare to find a man imperfectly acquainted with all these things, and a person wholly ignorant of them is a sort of phenomenon .... It is difficult to imagine the incredible rapidity with which thought cir ­ culates in the midst of these deserts [wilderness]. I do not think that so much intellectual activity exists in the most enlightened and populous districts of France."

Research shows that, beginning in the early 1900's, the teaching of the philosophy undergirding the Constitu­tion and the principles incorporated in it began to be eliminated from the public schools of America. Conse­quently, several generations of Americans have not been taught the principles which would enable them to be guardians of their own liberty, and they have not been able to serve as "watchmen on the walls" who could recognize encroachments when they occurred. Even most of the law schools do not train the nation's law students in the philosophical foundations of the Constitution.

It must be remembered that the principles of the Con­stitution and the philosophy undergirding those principles represent:

If the people do not have an understanding of these basic things, then they will be incapable of preserving them.

Does The Constitution Provide The
Means Of Recovering The Original Intent?

Without a doubt, those departures from the Framers' intent listed above, and others as well, result in serious questions about the ultimate success of their experiment. We should note, however, that the Framers built well, and the Constitution, despite the buffeting it has taken, is still extremely viable in one crucial respect: namely, the channels for restoration remain open. Nothing - not even Amendments - has altered the distribution of powers or the basic institutional relationships set forth by the Founders. This means, in effect, that the PEOPLE can operate through Congress to bring the system back into line. If the people, through knowledgeable, good judg­ment, select members of Congress who have the courage to act, the Founders' system can be restored.

A determined Congress, for instance, is more than a match for a judiciary bent upon advancing the doctrine of judicial supremacy and encroaching upon the Legislative prerogatives intended by the Founders. Such a Congress could, as it has done in the past, limit the appellate jurisdiction of the Court. The Senate could carefully screen presidential nominations to the federal courts, particularly the Supreme Court, and refuse to con, firm those who support judicial "activism." Or, at the ex­treme, Congress could impeach and remove those justices who, to use Alexander Hamilton's terminology, habitually exercise "will" (the intended prerogative of the Legislature), not "judgment," in interpreting the Constitu­tion. In sum, Congress is equipped with all the weapons to win any "shoot out" with the Court. In all likelihood, if history serves as any guide, the mere threat of their use would suffice to restore the proper relationships between the branches called for by the separation of powers principle.

Congress also possesses ample means to restore some semblance of balance with respect to state-national rela­tions. Much could be accomplished simply through legislation, or through a more discreet use of congressional powers to allow the states greater latitude. Congress could, probably through legislation (or amendment, if need be), assert the sole authority to enforce the "due process" and "equal protection' clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment through appropriate legislation, thereby depriving the courts of the means to impose their will upon the states. This corrective measure would, by itself, go a long way toward restoring vitality to the federal principle, while simultaneously putting the judiciary back into its proper constitutional place.

While the Constitution provides the means of restora­tion, clearly the process is a difficult one.

What Is Necessary To Bring
About Such Restoration?

As demonstrated above, restoration of the Founders' formula for preserving liberty is, indeed, possible through the mechanisms provided by their Constitution. But what must take place in order for such restoration to occur?


Will The Experiment Succeed?

It was John Adams who said: "The foundation of every government is some principle or passion in the minds of the people." Clearly, the Founders' passion was liberty, and in order to secure that liberty, they sought out and incor­porated into the United States Constitution those ideas and principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence.

The French historian, Guizot, once asked James Russell Lowell, "How long will the American republic endure?" Lowell replied: "As long as the IDEAS of the men who founded it continue dominant"

Herein lies the answer to the question, "Will the Experiment Succeed?"

It can and will succeed IF the motivating "principle or passion in the minds of the people" is LIBERTY, and if that passion causes them to exert the determination and will to complete the needed restoration of the IDEAS upon which the great American experiment was based.

Our Ageless Constitution, W. David Stedman & La Vaughn G. Lewis, Editors (Asheboro, NC, W. David Stedman Associates, 1987) Part VII:  ISBN 0-937047-01-5

29 posted on 09/22/2012 8:57:52 AM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

It’s the best a conservative can do? buying media’s lies and blaming Romney?

30 posted on 09/22/2012 8:59:05 AM PDT by granada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12
Don't worry. He is wrong. Mitt in a walk. Crowds tell the tale. The crowds you don't see in the propaganda media. Mitt's are huge and Owebama’s are small. The propaganda media pulled the same stuff with Regan when he beat Carter. Mitt wasn't my first choice, nor my second, nor even third but I would crawl ten miles over broken beer bottles to vote for him aver the 0 in chief and the rest of the dims down ballot. And I am not alone. Let's try something to show our support for America. Let's put out an empty chair every Saturday in our front yard. Shall we?
31 posted on 09/22/2012 9:02:28 AM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12
Feder wants Romney to talk like Gingrich?

OK, that will solidify about 20% of the vote behind him - and might stave off a tiny percentage of defectors to Virgil Goode.

Then what? Obama will just have a whole new set of talking points to fax to the MSM.

The Obama Administration has been engaging in a spectacular display of self-destruction over the last few weeks. The MSM doesn't like talking about it, but the facts are getting through to the public even with all of the slanted reporting in the way.

Romney is just standing aside and letting the Administration flail around, as he should. The time to hit hard is in the last three weeks. The whole structure of the Administration is rotten - one well-timed knockout blow will end it. But it's still a bit too early.

If Romney were McCain I might be worried. But I don't think he is that kind of "hands-across-the-aisle" conciliator by nature.

32 posted on 09/22/2012 9:02:35 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bayard
Feder is trying to give Romney some good advice. I hear similar comments coming from conservatives here in VA. When the hell is Romney is goinhg to take the gloves off? His latest release of a summary of his tax returns is another example of how Romney caves in rather than attacks.

Romney should have just released his 2011 returns along with his 2010 returns as promised and let it go at that. He should then have launched into an attack on Obama for his failure to release his school records, his medical records (in 2008 all Obama released was a one-page summary), etc. Obama is the one who is secretive and less than forthcoming on this background.

We now know of more than two dozen lies in Obama's Dreams from my Father. Romney should be attacking Obama's personal narrative not just his policies. What about Obama's association with terrorists like Ayers and Dohrn or extremists like Rev Wright or communists like Frank Marshall Davis?

It is already early voting time in states like Ohio and VA. People are casting their votes today. The Dems are busing them to the polls. It is time to unleash whatever you might have. Probably one-third of the votes will be cast prior to election day.

What Feder and many others may be missing is that the rapidly changing demographics of this country have changed electoral politics. The Dems will become the permanent majority party if we don't stop this insane policy of bringing in 1.2 million LEGAL immigrants every year--87% minorities as classificed by the USG. One in 8 residents of this country is foreign born (the highest in 90 years) compared to one in 21 in 1970 and one in 13 in 1990. Minorities and immigrants vote overwhelmingly Dem.

33 posted on 09/22/2012 9:02:35 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

not to mention a media completely in the tank for Zero

34 posted on 09/22/2012 9:05:15 AM PDT by edzo4 (You call us the 'Party Of No', I call us the resistance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

not to mention a media completely in the tank for Zero

35 posted on 09/22/2012 9:05:15 AM PDT by edzo4 (You call us the 'Party Of No', I call us the resistance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

“A typical shoot your own side in the back instead of using your forum to attack the Leftist Media machine from another faux conservative media clown”

Yeah. Stuff like this is just faux conservative media clownage:

• An unemployment rate of 8.1%, compared to 7.8% when he took office. That’s on top of the 7.7 million who’ve dropped out of the labor force. Long-term unemployment is up 87%.

• The labor force participation rate is 63.5%, the lowest since 1981.

• The number of Americans in poverty went from 39.8 million to 46.2 million. Food stamp recipients are up 46%.

• Inflation-adjusted, middle-class income has declined by $3,900.

• The federal debt increased a staggering 51% since January 2009. This year’s federal deficit will weigh in at $1.1 trillion. Obama has posted the only $1 trillion-plus deficits (4 of them), in our history.

• The retail price of gas rose over 100% during the Obama years. The average price of beef increased from $3.69 to $6.99 a pound. Home values are down 40%-60%. The values of IRAs and 401ks fell 20% to 50%.

• Unless the president and Congress act, the top tax rates will go up from 33% to 36% and 35% to 39.6% on January 1, 2013. Obama is targeting those with incomes of over $200,000, the people whose investments drive economic expansion. As we enter the next recession (did the last ever end?), Obama is siphoning more money from job-creation to the black hole of federal spending. The CBO estimates that by the second quarter of next year, unemployment will be over 9%.

Obamacare is causing 83% of physicians to consider getting out of medicine. Perhaps you can guess what that will mean for those of us who’ll need more than a Band-Aid and an aspirin in the years ahead.

At least it is to the faux conservative commissariat of choreographed proskynesis.

36 posted on 09/22/2012 9:05:29 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans. Don't read their lips. Watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

not to mention a media completely in the tank for Zero

37 posted on 09/22/2012 9:05:29 AM PDT by edzo4 (You call us the 'Party Of No', I call us the resistance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12
Ok adjust the Media polls to assume that the Dems will not do as good as they did in 2008 and will do better then they did in 2010 and what do you come up with? To be on the safe side adjust the polling to give the Dems a +4 advantage. What happens to the polling now?

What Rassmussen is showing. A tie game

38 posted on 09/22/2012 9:05:51 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

He is remember carter’s poll numbers and then the land slide happened.Poll are useless and debaites are just words,it’s a mans actions that count.
Obama’s good with words but he sucks when it comes to action.

39 posted on 09/22/2012 9:07:07 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DefeatCorruption

“You’d never catch the Dems doing this...they boost up and fight and defend obama with their last dying breath...”

Well, the Democrats are entirely a party of lickspittle, credulous, stump broke whores and peons who know not to question what they are told are their betters. The Geriatric Old Plotters do not yet enjoy the luxury of such an obsequious base, although they are gaining on it.

40 posted on 09/22/2012 9:11:11 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (Voodoo Republicans. Don't read their lips. Watch their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-192 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson